Friday, May 27, 2005

What's Wrong with Revenge of the Sith

I must humbly disagree with Matt regarding the merits of Revenge of the Sith.

Now, the good. First and most importantly: Lightsabers. They kick ass. The lightsaber combat in this film is by far the best in any of the films.


The best light saber duel in the Star Wars series comes in the worst film, The Phantom Menace. The battle between Obi Wan, Darth Maul, And Quai Gon remains unmatched. I was not impressed by the light saber combat in Revenge of the Sith. Lucas violated the central precept of on screen fencing; it's not real fencing. Fenching is not a terribly entertaining sport to watch, because it takes place at a speed no reasonable person can follow. I found that all of the light saber duels in Revenge of the Sith were too fast, and too hard to follow. This was a problem in itself, but created a second problem. Because the duels ended so quickly, none carried the psychological impact of Vader's battle with Luke in Empire, or Darth Maul defeat at the hands of Obi Wan in Phantom Menace. When Count Dooku died, I should have been emotionally invested, but I was not. I really ought to have been invested in the final duel, but again I felt unmoved (although it was kind of cool that Obi Wan defeats Anakin when the latter attempts the same move that Obi Wan pulled on Darth Maul in the first film).

This was not my only problem with the film.

While Hayden Christiansen displayed genuine menace as Darth Vader in the second half of the film, his performance was bookended by weak points. As others have noted, Anakin's conversion to the dark side took place with far too little preparation. This is perhaps not wholly correct; there is some preparation, but Lucas sabotages the narrative by having Anakin betray Darth Sidious to Mace Windu and the rest of the Jedi Council. I'm all for the occasional treacherous lieutenant, but this behavior made Anakin seem skittish, indecisive, and even a bit flaky. Sith are not indecisive, and the narrative would have been better served by a more linear move to the dark side.

The reconstruction of Darth Vader was visually interesting, but the conversation between Vader and Sidious undercuts its power. I demand a modicum of dignity from my newly minted evil servants, but Darth Sidious apparently requires none from his. Far better than the "Noooooo" nonsense regarding the death of his Senatorial tart would have been a reaction similar to the one Vader has at the end of Empire. Instead of raging and destroying Piett, Vader simply walks away following Luke's escape.

That's grace. That's dignity. That's the dark side of the force.

Since we're on the subject, let's discuss Vader's tart. While Matt correctly notes the problems created by the lack of a Han Solo figure, he doesn't mention the almost complete absence of a strong female lead. Leia was a princess, and she knew how to boss people around. Upon being rescued from the clutches of Grand Moff Tarkin (whose appearance in Revenge of the Sith is all too brief) she insults her benefactors and takes commmand. That's a woman. Padme, in comparison, is a doorstop. Indeed, such attachments on the part of one of my prime servants would arouse deep suspicion as to his discernment. Dies of grief? Not worthy of Vader's attention.

Speaking of Grand Moff Tarkin, it takes them 19 years to build the first Death Star, and only four to build the second? I would have the contractors associated with the first executed. . .

I was similarly troubled by the political situation described by the film. I cannot understand why the Senate so readily believed that the Jedi had moved against Palpatine and the Republic, nor can I grasp why it granted supreme lifetime executive power to Palpatine with so little fuss. From the first two films, we are to believe that the Senate was corrupt, obstructionist, and mind-bendingly slow in the face of a crisis. I can believe that Palpatine controlled some, and bought off others, but I cannot understand how he came to win virtually unanimous acclaim. Palpatine seemed not to have this level of control over the Senate 19 years later, when it apparently played some obstructionist role.

Then again, Jar Jar Binks didn't get any lines. That's something.

No comments: